After the numerous times throughout history where societies found what they believed, in matters of religion, science or social subjects, was lies; or how we look what past societies believed as the truth and we now know it was false, after all those times where people formulated and spread lies about past or present events to manipulate or decieve in favor of their own agenda
How do you know the history you believe as true isn't just the lies created by other men?
There is no way of knowing. The broad strokes I imagine are there.
>>37478
nothing is objectively true and everything is open to interpretation and re-evaluation
>inb4 except the holocaust
>>37478
This is the fourth thread with this same shitty premise.
Fuck off.
Archaeology is sculpted by the victors.
History is written by the literate.
>>37478
Ideology isn't a lie, it's a belief system, a constructed reality, and a political tool. That histories as a rule figure into grand ideologies is not a perversion of their original intent to tell the tale of how important political events transpired, but a means by which to order chaotic, meaningless and multifold phenomena into a hierarchy of meaning, which is always slanted according to the interests of the author and the (dominant) social class he belongs to.
>>37478
From Antiquity when Greeks and Greek slaves to Rome to the 20th century and the German historiography of the last 70 years it were actually the losers who made the major contributions to the writing of history - not the victors.
The victors ain't gotta explain shit. The losing nations however are still there and need to explain what the fuck happened.
>>37525
>nothing is objectively true
Ah come on. We are past that.
>>37683
in regard to history that statement is objectively true
:^)
>>37478
There's a difference between holding an incorrect notion, like the earth is flat, and actually having definitive evidence of a nitionotion, like the earth is round. I believe things only things thst are accompanied by observable, testable, repeatable data.
>>37738
It is objectively true that the Mayans lived in the south-central Americas
>>37889
Reductionism, I say!
>>37930
aliens or tanned jews
next
>>37738
That's something innit? But seriously people who claim nothing is objectively true never did groundwork with sources, If I translate a Papyrus that c-14 tells me is 2000 years old and the price for whine on it is 2 denarii I know that around 2000 years ago somebody wrote this price on the papyrus.
If you argue that shit you go full French structuralism and are incapable of writing history or discuss anything really (Stuart Hall wrote some papers on this problem).
>>37953
What? That didn't even come close to addressing. Archaeologists have found human remains in the area as well as architecture, art, etc that discuss those people. And those people are named Mayans. Even if they're "tanned Jews" they're still called Mayans within the context of that area.
>>38149
Man if you go full retard you could just say Jews planted them there and paid historians etc. to obstruct the truth. If you leave the boundaries of scientific discussion (thesis, falsification, arguments whatever) you can claim any retardation to be true.
That anon was joking though.
>>37632
Wow
>>37632
damn, son
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nSZn5kpaLw
history is written by the victor, history is filled with liars.
from his perspective shepard was a jew.
>>38439
>CoD
not even once
>>37738
Check out Arthur Marwick's stuff. His view is that there is an objective truth to everything that happened, the question is how capable we are of uncovering and understanding that truth with the sources available to us.
There is no truth, there are only stories being told. None of them are more right or more wrong than what they appear to be.
